...
(c)(1) The court's decision whether to approve or reject a settlement will be reasoned and will include, inter alia, all of the following:
(a) the definition of the group to which the settlement applies;
(b) the causes of action, the material questions of fact or law common to all the members of the class and the remedies claimed as detailed in the motion for certification or as defined in the court's decision under section 14, as the case may be;
(c) The main points of the settlement arrangement.
(2) In its decision under paragraph (1), the court shall address, inter alia, the following considerations:
(a) the gap between the relief proposed in the settlement arrangement and the relief that the class members would have received had the court ruled on the class action in favor of the class;
(b) Objections filed under section 18(d), and their determination;
(c) the stage at which the proceeding is located;
(d) An opinion of the examiner given in accordance with subsection (b)(5);
(e) the risks and chances of continuing to conduct the class action vis-à-vis the advantages and disadvantages of the settlement;
(f) The grounds and remedies in respect of which the decision to approve the settlement constitutes an act of the court against the members of the class to whom the arrangement applies."
- The group to which the settlement applies: "All IEC customers who have made use of any digital platform operated by the IEC, such as the IEC's website or applications."
- The causes of action as detailed in the application for approval: breach of the provisions of the Protection of Privacy Law, 5741-1981; breach of contract; deception and breach of the duty of good faith by virtue of the Contracts (General Part) Law, 5733-1973; fraudulent torts, negligence and breach of statutory duty set forth in the Torts Ordinance [New Version]; Violation of the Uniform Contracts Law, 5743-1982; Unjust enrichment by virtue of the Enrichment Law and not in law, 1979; Grounds by virtue of the Consumer Protection Law, 5741-1981.
- The common questions of the class members as it arises from the application for approval: the question of the violation of the provisions of the law against the class members and the appropriate compensation therefor.
- The remedies claimed as detailed in the motion for approval: compensation and an injunction.
Ending the process with a settlement is the most efficient and fair way to resolve the dispute in the circumstances of the case
- After examining the arguments of the parties and the comments of the professional bodies, I found that the settlement reflects a proper, fair and balanced solution to the claim in the circumstances of the case. The arrangement will save the continuation of the litigation and entail a proper benefit for the respondent's customers and for the public interest. I will first note that in light of the long time that has elapsed from the time the application for approval of a settlement was submitted and transferred to the professional bodies in the state, until the submission of the position, about eight months later; Taking into account that the essence of the arrangement relates to the adoption of norms and the determination of measures for information security and the protection of customers' privacy, in addition to the obligations imposed on the Respondent for the benefit of its customers and the public; and taking into account Amendment 13 to the Protection of Privacy Law, which will take effect from August 14, 2025, and as a matter of course, the IEC will uphold; I saw fit to examine the usefulness of the settlement agreement that is requested to be approved at the time of its submission, excluding the delay of the professional bodies in the country who submitted a comprehensive and extensive position with great delay. This is in order to prevent harm to the parties and out of an understanding of the importance of submitting the positions of the professional bodies in the state, which, even if they are not always accepted in full, are internalized into the arrangements submitted for approval and improve them, and are an important tool from a professional and neutral body to the court.
- With regard to the considerations that the court must consider when examining a motion to approve a settlement in accordance with section 19 of the Class Actions Law, the Honorable Justice Baron explained:
"When examining a request to approve a settlement in a class proceeding, the court must consider the chances and risks inherent in the continuation of the proceeding as it assesses them – and from this perspective examine whether the proposed arrangement is 'proper, fair and reasonable'. It should be clarified that this is the criterion that underlies most, if not all, of the considerations listed in Regulation 19(c)(2) of the Class Actions Law, and it appears that the parameters listed in this section are aids to analyzing the question of whether the settlement at issue is appropriate to the chances of the action and the risks involved in its continued management." See: HCJ 2744/19 Acre Municipality v. Brill Shoe Industries Ltd. (para. 16) [Nevo] (March 10, 2021)